HDR-Stream and Lake

[Dave_2_@hotmail.com]

Took these high dynamic range images in the Pocono Mountain region of Pennsylvania, what do you think? Definitely a novice in the HDR world, but trying to improve. Any comments or critiques would be appreciated.

-Dave
Christenson Photography
www.ChristensonPhoto.Com

[Dave_2_@hotmail.com]

Oh and all on them were 1.7 exposure increments and comprised of three shots.


Dave
Christenson Photography
www.christensonphoto.com

[n8]

hdr seems to be a very subjective technique, so it all depends on what you're trying to achieve. I know some people do them purely to balance the exposure in a seen. Some do them to be very obvious. I personally prefer them somewhere in between. I'd say for yours the saturation is way too high. #2 & #3 look pretty grungy...not dirty grungy...that's just the term for a very strong hdr look, painted like. I think the motion from the clouds takes away from #1, maybe you can take the middle exposure, make two copies and do a pseudo hdr from that.

[Frog]

Too overdone for me. Don't know what else to say about them.

[GB1]

Well said by theCouncil. HDR is artistic and everyone's feelings will differ. I personally lean toward the only-use-to-balance-the-exposure camp, but I am OK with others preference for artistic endeavors. I think the painted look of 2nd and 3rd can work, but one should only use it for more simple scenes, not when there's this much detail. Or perhaps in a portrait to create a very abstract feeling? Overall though, HDRs can really blur the line between photography and art and I think that's a good thing.

The first is a nice shot BTW. Sort of dreamy.

G

[Don Schaeffer]

Sure have an impact! I love HDR stuff myself. They are not just ordinary photos.

[naznomore_92]

I really like the first one I think the blues and reds mix with the HDR effect look awesome. I am a big fan of HDR pics...these are great.